Critiquing: You've Gotta Love It!
Lauren Royal © 2006
Many of us have a love-hate relationship with critiquing. We love
how it improves our work, but we hate wrestling with our bad
feelings when we receive negative feedback. We love helping others
and all we learn about our own writing by doing a critique, but we
hate how difficult and time-consuming it is to do it right. We love
sharing our stories, but we hate exposing our work as a target for
criticism.
Love it or hate it, it's necessary. We can do it face-to-face,
through the mail or e-mail. We can use a critique partner or group,
or we can critique ourselves, relying on our own instincts to revise
our writing. The method doesn't matter. But we need to be able to
look at our own work and others' with a kind but critical eye.
Critiquing is much more than looking for misplaced commas and
misspelled words. In fact, those things are best dealt with before
the critique begins. Your chapter isn't ready for critiquing until
you've run spell check, looked for misused words a spell-checker
won't catch (like mixing up there, their, and they're), and gone
over everything for proper grammar and punctuation. When the time
arrives to critique, it is best to focus on the bigger picture. Here
are some basic questions you can ask yourself when you critique.
Overall, does the chapter work? Is it enjoyable reading?
Does it make you want to read more? What specifically, if anything,
pulls you out of the story? Is anything confusing?
Is the chapter's opening effective? At the beginning, is
it clear how much time has elapsed, where the scene is set, and
whose head we are in? Does the opening hook you into wanting to read
the rest?
Does the chapter's ending work? Does it make you want to
read the next chapter to see what happens next?
Does the plot work? Do you like what is happening? Does it
draw you into the story? Does the plot move forward in this chapter?
Is the plot believable, or does some detail make you sit up and say
"no way"?
Does each individual scene work? Does each scene serve a
purpose--either characterization or moving the story forward? Does
any of the writing seem aimless? Is each scene immediate, with
action and dialogue, or do any of them tell what happened offstage?
Is there any narrative summary that would be better off converted
into scenes?
How are the pacing and flow? Are sentence lengths and
structures varied? Are any of the paragraphs too long? Does the
chapter move along at a pleasant clip? Is the pacing either too
intense or too slow?
Is the dialogue well written? Does it seem natural? Is it
too realistic and therefore boring? ("Hi, how are you?" "Fine, and
you?" Snore.) Do characters call each other by name more often than
is natural? Does each character have his or her own distinctive
voice? If dialect is used, does it work or is it too much? Is the
language appropriate for the time period?
Is the narrative well written? Is there too much or not
enough detail about places, events, and internal thoughts? Are these
things well integrated, or are there big blocks of it that disrupt
the chapter's forward motion? Do the settings feel real to you? Do
the characters' feelings seem appropriate? Is there too much passive
voice? Has the author avoided repeating words and phrases?
Is the writing mostly showing, rather than telling? Do the
characters see and experience life, or is the story told through
narration and introspection? Are the five senses used in
description? Is the author overexplaining instead of allowing
readers to come to their own conclusions? Are there too many speech
tags that tell? (For example: "You have got to be kidding," she said
angrily.) Where could action be used to show instead? ("You have got
to be kidding." She threw the apple at his head.)
Is the writing too wordy? Is the author saying the same
thing twice when one sentence or paragraph will do the job? Are
there a lot of words that could be cut to improve the flow?
Redundant words or phrases? (For example: absolutely sure, knelt
down, audible to the ear. In each of these cases, one word--sure,
knelt, audible--says it more cleanly.)
Is backstory and other necessary information handled
effectively? Is critical information woven into the story
unobtrusively, or are there big blocks of it that disrupt the story?
Are there too many flashbacks? Too much internalization or
exposition? In dialogue, are characters telling each other things
they already know?
Are there any problems with POV (point of view) or author
intrusion? Are there paragraphs written in more than one POV?
Are POV switches obvious and jarring, or seamless and transparent?
Are there any instances of author intrusion?
Do you like the characters? Do they seem like
well-rounded, believable people you can identify with, or does
anyone seem boring or flat? Do you care what happens to the hero and
heroine? Is the villain a worthy opponent?
Can you feel the sexual tension? Is there a sense of
romance? Does the relationship move forward in this chapter? Is the
hero and heroine's attraction evident, and the reasons for it clear?
Are intimate moments realistic, and do they evolve and play out
naturally? Do intimate moments and thoughts fit into the overall
essence of the chapter, or do they seem to come out of nowhere?
If there is a love scene . . . Does the physical activity
make sense? (No contortionists here!) Are the five senses and
emotions used, so it's not just a recital of which body parts go
where?
Is everything consistent? Are the details (eye coloring,
clothing worn, furniture in the room) the same from the beginning of
the scene or chapter to the end? Are the scenes and events in an
order that makes sense? Does the time elapsed seem reasonable?
Do the facts seem accurate? Does everything seem feasible?
Does the heavy action (fights, chases) work physically? Does the
science match what you know, and what was known in the time period
the story is set in? Is the clothing and geography accurate to the
best of your knowledge? (You are not expected to do the other
person's research!)
It can be helpful to summarize for the author what the chapter
accomplished in terms of character development, conflicts created or
resolved, and mysteries introduced or solved. This will let her know
whether she has achieved her expectations for the chapter and where
she might need to adjust. If you're critiquing yourself, think about
what you meant this chapter to accomplish and whether or not you
succeeded.
Compose your critique with the other person's feelings in mind.
This doesn't mean you should hold back on your comments, but present
them as the opinions they are, not as concrete fact. Be truthful,
but gentle. If possible, give examples of the author's writing to
illustrate your comments. Spend as much time working on a critique
as you'd like the other person to spend working on yours.
Above all, remember to put positive things into your critique,
too! We all need to know what we're doing right, as much or even
more than we need to know what we're doing wrong. If you notice
anything (a line, a paragraph, a brilliant description, a bit of
snappy dialogue, a clever phrase, or even a single word) that makes
you stop and think, "Wow! I wish I'd written that!"--tell the
writer! She'll want to make sure she does more of that. Besides, it
will give her warm fuzzies, and every little bit of encouragement
helps. When you're reading your own work, don't forget to give
yourself a pat on the back every time you notice something you're
really proud to have written.
When you read a critique from someone else, consider each point
carefully, then take what advice works for you--and leave the rest.
It is your book and your voice. You don't want your manuscript to
become a mishmash of everyone's opinions and voices, or something so
clean and bland it has no life of its own. Be true to yourself and
your vision of the story.
Happy Critiquing . . . and may we all learn to love it!
|
